The September 2000 issue of Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith
left me in a somewhat exasperated state. It seems to me that we are reworking
the same issues in the relationship between science and religion as we were when
I first subscribed to our Journal many years ago. It is almost boring. At the
ripe age of 81 years, I look back at a lifelong interest in both, religion and
science and am amazed that our leaders have advanced so little in understanding
both.

I believe that God is the creator of the cosmos, and hence has established
all the natural laws that comprise the various fields of knowledge that are open
to our intelligence: mathematics, astronomy, all the areas of science, health,
weather, communication, gravity, functioning of the human mind, etc., etc. That
is, God has set in motion the whole cosmos and put the controls on it which keep
it functioning properly as we experience it today. It is all the work of God.

Obviously this means that everything the scientists tell us describes God's
handiwork and how it functions. Of course, scientists make mistakes, they still
are far from possessing the ultimate truth, they interpret findings from their
own presuppositions, and they frequently change their views. It is only a few
years ago when they scoffed at the notion of shifting continents, and at the
suggestion that the magnetic pole could reverse polarity. We have similar
problems in interpreting our Christian faith. How does God control the cosmos,
and what are his purposes in what he does? These are difficult questions for
puny humans, and may be forever beyond human comprehension.

Some of the articles get tied up with the philosophical questions about what
God can do and what he cannot do. They extend into questions like "Can
there be death before sin?" I think that God had a good laugh at our
periodical while he was perusing it over a cup of coffee during his morning
break, in heaven. Of course, I know he is a rational God, but I suspect he plays
a few jokes on us when he is tired of our puny philosophizing, when we try to
restrict his abilities according to the limits we set on what he can do. Our
wise philosophers are poor at defining God and putting limitations on what he
can do.

Although our contributors are learned in science and in philosophy it seems
they are still not able to understand the language of the Bible, especially
Genesis. Genesis is not a treatise on science not is it a record of history,
although it is more reliable in these areas than any contemporary pagan
writings. As soon as the serpent talks with a human voice in Genesis 3 we know
that we are dealing with a fable because we know that serpents do not talk.
Also, when we compare the two creation accounts in Genesis 2 and 3 we realize
that God is revealing the truth to us through paradox. As I have studied the
literature of five different languages, I am clearly aware that truth is
revealed through paradox, and if we study God's Word carefully we find that
God uses this method throughout the Bible.

I shall end with a note on suffering. If we could go through life without
suffering, especially unjust suffering, we would end up as spineless jellyfish.
Evil and suffering force us to use our ability to choose, by means of which we
create our character and personality, and rise above our animal nature. Through
them God fashions us for the purposes He has in mind for us after we graduate
from this earth.

Please excuse my language, I know it has been too harsh at times, but
sometimes I just rebel at what I hear among "educated" Christians.